From: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com>
Cc: Dani Oderbolz <oderbolz@ecologic.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 15:01:46 -0700
Message-ID: <3F45414A.6030301@joeconway.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <25062.1061498540@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20030821102627.C51705-100000@megazone.bigpanda.com>
<25062.1061498540@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm toying with the notion of ripping out that logic and instead
> building an in-memory hashtable of already-returned TIDs. This could
> theoretically run out of memory if the multiple indexscan returns enough
> tuples, but I think in practice that wouldn't happen because the planner
> wouldn't choose an indexscan when very large numbers of tuples are being
> selected.
I thought with your recent changes, you could use dynahash, which
already spills to disk instead of consuming all memory?
Joe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: mail@joeconway.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com, oderbolz@ecologic.de, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] "SELECT IN" Still Broken in 7.4b
In-Reply-To: <3F45414A.6030301@joeconway.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox